Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout82-58 AMENDMENT 2 OF 3N p :R ', a , • 1 y � "NNING C TSION SUMMARY fil"IE_T_ APPLICANT Butte GOuncy r Lannlu LMIL Jmeaor ADDRESS 7 County CentexDrive OWNER Various PROJECT DESCRIPTION Amendment to the Butte County Code to rename Sec. 24-6� A��_ (11 Gene.ral) to Um(Unclassified), renumber the section to 24-195 and revise Lhe. wor tag. County Wide N PROPERTY ZONED LOCATED ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUAiS9R(S) IDENTIFIED AS AP PROJECT CONSISTENT? CITY GEN. PLAN DATE APPLICATION RECEIVED ,,,5721-85 DATE REZONING PETITION SIGNATURES CHECKED PERCENTAGE' DATE. LEGAL DESCRIPTION PREPARED OR CHECKED: DATE PUBLICATION NOTICE WRITTEN PHBLISHED DATE DISPLAY AD PREPARED PUBLISHED PLACE NEWSPAPER NOTICE (S) PUBLISHED Ci'. C i P . G• B DATE MAILING LIST PREPARED DATE MAIL OUT NOTXCESWRITTEN MAILED__ � ENVIRONMENTAL CATEGORICAL L-XBMPTION �, DATE FILED DETERMINATION .� IVEGATI1/E DECLARATION - ;DATE ADOPTED AND DATE ENV. IMPACT REPORT DANE CERTIFIED OTHER w.. .... :.,�r........_..., COMMISSION HEARING DATES �SUA) opt� COMMISSION AC TON .�J' Cv��:�„ . �. BOARD ACTION. ORD INMICH(5) ADOPTED-------�-------• C0*1ENTs r. 85-579 Butte County Planning Commission propcsed negative declaration regarding ewranmental impact and code amendment to the Butte County Code to rename rection 24-56 A-2 (general) to 0 (unclassified). renumber the section to 24-195 and revise the wording. Motion: FOUND THAT THE REQUIREMENTS OF CEQA HAVE BEEN MET AND ADOPTED A NEGATIVE DECLARATION REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; POUND THAT THIS ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT CONFORMS TO THE BUTTE COUNTY GENERAL PLAN; ADOPTED ORDINANCE2488' AKI''MING THE CODE TO RENAME A-2 TO U, AND REVISE THE WORDING AS PROPOSED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION, +M S ;=- Vote: 1 Y 2 Y 3 N 4 Y 5 Y �Una,nimousjy carried) y a HUS" E COUN7''s;A0AAb OV 8� 180.RS MINUTES ,- 8' 'fttmbat 11, 1985 6. Butte unnpngotissio sed negative declaration regarding evronnand c©de emendm2nt to the Butte County Code to rename Section 24-66 A-2 (general) t.) U (unclassified), renumber the section to 24-195 and revise the Wording. SET HEARING DATE t4)R SEPTEMBER 17; 19$5 AT 11:30 A.M. i Butte County Planning Commission proposed Negative Declaration and Code Amendment to the Butte County Code to rename Section 24-66 A-2 (General) to U (Unclassified), renumber the section to 24-195 and revise the warding,. (Continued closed from 7/11185 Motion of Intent) Bettye Kircher stated that at the last meeting there had been some confusion between wrat this recommendation is and the ultimate amendment that may come out in the over-all recodification. There are some differences. The change of name did not require this hearing; it was the change of purpose and intent and the typea of uaes that would require a Use Permit. It does allow single-family 'residential and agricultural uses. The rest of the land uses would. r'equit`e review under the Use Permit process. Chairman Avis observed that the Zor►ing Orrdinanete Subcommittee had. recommended something different from this, but other changes can be addressed when the entire "Zoning 0,.olinance is redone. It was moved by Commissioner Lambe'"t, seconded by Commissioner Verc`ruse and unanimously carried, es follows. A. Note that the requirements of CRQA have been met and recommend that a Negative Declaration regarding environmental impact be adopted; and B. Note that the zoning ordinance amendment conforma to the tutte County General Plan in that restricting; uses in the A-9 Zona 0111 -bring the areas so zoned into more substantial compliance with the General plan;j Oemticularly the Land Ose Elements, for consistency between the County Zoning ordinance and the lanuse plan maps, and C. Recommend that the Board of Supervisors adopt an Ordinance amending the Cutte County Code,"Chapter 24a Section 24-66 by renaming the 'A_2 (General) :sone to the U (Unclassified) zhe renumbering the section to 24-195 and revising the wording Els proposed. • Butte County Planning Commission - proposed Negative Declaration and Code Amendment to the Butte County Code tti. rename Station 24-66 A-2 (General) to 0 (Unci assified)l renumber the section to 24-195 and revise the, wording. (Continued from 6/6/95 File e4-19) The Cor,mission waived the reading of, the staff -findings. Staff stated that this proposal would restrict the land use to single family residential with at -her uses being considered through the une permit process, but that the areas designated industrial on the General PlAn, still under A-2 zoning, would be a prablem inasmuch as in the industrial areas it takes a use permit for residential land U510. Chairman Avis felt that the easiest way to handle this would be to go ahead with the change over to the U 7one and initiate a rezone of those arLEIS that arm, designated industrial. Staff commented that if the'Cammission does apprOVO the prapotold amendment the ahallerMes to the County for not having *Il the land use in conformity witi-, tF,,e General Plan should be minimj,zed, Chairman Avis %t8ted tha;t the U '/one would ER110K SihqlO-Family resi dent ial, with overything else requirinq a, use permit. Comminsioner Walter read a draft of the praposedOrdiknance. Commissioner Lambert questioned the commercial areas. Staff stated that there was only a conflict with the areas designated industrial. The hearing was opened to the pL61ic. George Robison, City of Oroville, stated that thert? Would bonoimpact to the City -of Orovillei He felt that this Went a lono way toward bringing about tome consistency. ?lea StaVeleyj Town of Paeadlse4 stated that the agrood With Mr., Robison, Fred. Gerttq City Of 01-id101Y W--\ts also in 7qr**nmht, COmmittiover Lambert felt this was loho overdue. Gtaff felt this Would give them two controls, I on density of the General Plan and the other on development. Commissioner Walter Wanted an ordinante brought +orwmja-d for them to vote on. A rnotioh 64 intent for approval was made by Commissioner Lambert, seconded by Commissioner Verarktse, and QhAhiMOUMY carried was 4qIjtjw%t i 0- 1 98 U�V, 'PLAMINO', 0 141 S I' Ob As proposed, the U (Unclassified) zbnp„ would allow Single family dwellingso accessory buildings, agricultural uses, and agricultural buildings as per•mi ttsad uses. All other~ uses presently ,Allowed. or conditional uses within the A-2 Zone would be subject;�L'o obtaining a use permit. The present A--2 Zone, as amended to limit densities to those in the General Plan, still allows a range o+ residential, commorciall and Xndustr"ial uses (some requiring a use permit) which are incompatible with the General Wlzn Thi-, hearing Was continued to July ��, 1985 at 7"100 ppm„ J, t: , '1.ANNN11I1� CJN_r�" q TOW, Planning Commission Steve Streeter, planning SUBJ5QTt Amendment of the A--2 (General) Zane to U (Unclassified) Zane DATE; July 16, 1985 Attached are the provisions for the amendment of the A-2 Zone to the "U" zone. A motion of intent was made to approve the zoning ordinance amendment at your July 11, 1985 meetirlg- f f any revisions to the "U" zone provisions are recommended, such revisions should be included in the motion. 5 UP 811 19 01. A. Note that the requirements of CECOA have been met and recommend that a Negative Declaration regarding ernvironmental impact be adopted; and t. Note that the zoning Ordinance amendment conforms to the Butte kl County Geri -oral. Plan in that rest ,i ata ng uses in the A-2 zone will bring the areas so toned into more- substantial compliance with the General plan, particularly the I -and Use F-1 ement , for consistency between the County zoning ordinance and the land use plan maps; and Rotommpnd that the Board of Super-vasors adopt an Ordinance amending the ):utte County Code, Chapter 24, Section '214-66 by renaming the A-2 (General.) zone to the U (Unclassified) zone, renumbering the sea -Lion to n4-195 and revising the wording as proposed, ;SAS . l r Section 24-195 U (Unclassified) (A) PURPOSE AND INTENT All the unincorporated area of the Cotin.ty of Butte not otherwise zoned by ordinance by the Board of 5upervioors is hereby zoned as a U (Unclassified) district, as such district is defined and subject to the t"egulAtions contained in Section 24-33 of this Chapter. (B) PERMITTED USES The following are the principal permitted uses in the U Zane: (a) Single -family dwelling per parcel and accessory but;ldings. (b) Agricultural uses and buildings. 4 (C) CONDITIONAL USES The following are conditional uses in a Zone: (a) Multiple -family dwellings, including duplexes, subject to the density specified by the General Plan; second dwelling unit allowed with no size restriction. (b) Commercial uses of land or buildings. (e) Recreational vehicle parks. (d) campsites, (e) Public or quasi-public uses including schools, churches, public buildings and public utility buildings,. (f) Junkyards, secondhand stores, auto wrecking yards, used car lots, trailer sales and equipment sales, (g) Commercial distillation of bones, abattoirs, auction YaL is, commercial livestock feed yards, commercial millings, canneries, lumber and lumber processing, tanneries, fat rendering, garbage-teed commercial hog raising, food and agriculture product processing vlants. (h) Country clubs, golf courses, racetracks,, drive-ins, bale, parkas riding , academies, bowling alleys, commercial amusement enterprises, taverns, dance halls and other places of recreation of a similar character. (i) Kennels and small animal hospitals and crematories. (j) Trailer courts, construction labor camps. (k) Commercial airports (excepting individual or private airports and those operated exclusively for agricultural purposes). (1) Cetneteries, crematoriesi mausoleums or other places of the burial or other disposal of the human dead. (m) Storage of 3,n "lawmables (excepting for agricultural. purposes), (n) Dumping and disposal areas. (o) MAnufacturin� of acids, explosives, fertilizer, glue, gyp-,,on, lime, plaster of p"tis, pulp and paper, 'beet sugar; crushed rock, saM and gravel, cement, concrete and/or asphalt batching plants, concrete and clay products. (p) Industrial uses which might be objectionable by reason of emission of noised offensive odor, smoke, duAtj bright light, vibration or involving the handling of explosives or dangerous materials. (q) Hydtd-electric generating facilities with installed capacity 'greater than five (5) tnegawatts. AdIhL (D) DENSITIES Residential densities not to exceed the densities as set the Butte County General Plan for forth in each specific site, (E) DEVELOPMENT STANDAIWS The minimum requirements shall he those for the type of usQ involved. ror instance, a residential use urould adhere to the development for the "R" ones and a commercial use � tsan standards for a "c" Would adhere to Pde a standards use. the development OTHER STANDARDS AND REQUIREMENTS The following additional standards and requirements shall A Zone, except where specifically modified for conditional uapp apply in a U (a) off-street Parking and loadn shall be a.. the provisions o Sec, 24-35;$ Provided in conformit y with fib) Limited control on land divisions: Any land to five W-acre minimum parcels unless rezonddivision toianzonell be limited With the General Plan de6ignation complying 4 1 BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given by the Butte County Planning Commission that public hearings will be held on Thursday, June 6, 1985 in the Butte County Board of Supervisors Room, County Administration Center, 25 County Center Drive, Oroville, California, regarding the following items at the .following times; ITE14S ON WHICH NEGATIVE DECLARATIONS 9:3() p.m.1 Butte County Planning Commission - Amendment to the Butte County Coale to rename Sect 2.4-66 A-2 (General) to U (U:nclassified), renumber. thesection to 24-195 and revise the wording to read as follows. Section 24-195 U �Jnclassified) (A) PURPOSE AND INTENT All the unincorporated area of the County of Butte not otherwise zoned by ordinance by the Board of Supervisors is hereby zoned as a U (Unclassified) district, as such district is defined and subject ::o the ragialtions contained' in Section 24-33 of this Chapter. (B) PERMITTED USES The following are the principal permitted uses in the U Zone: (a) Single-family dwelling per parcel and accessory buildings. (b) Agricultural uses and buildings, (C) CONDITIONAL USES The following are conditional uses in a U Zone (a) Multiple -family dwellings, including duplexes_, subject to the density specified by the General. Plan; second dwelling unit allowed with no size restriction. (b) Commercial uses of Land or buildings: (c) Recreational vehicle parks. (d) Campsites, (6) Public or quasi -public uses including schools, churches, public bu D dings and public utility buildings: (f) in kyards, secondhand stores,, auto wrecking yards, used car lots, trailer sales and equipment sales: (g} Commercial distillation of bones, abattoirs, auction yards, commercial livestock feed yards, commeticial millings, canneries, lumber and lumber processing, tanneries, fate rendering, garbage -fed commercial hog raising, food and agriculture product proressitir, pi,aOts. (h) Country clubs, golf courses, racetracks, drive. -ins, i3all parks, riding academies, bowling alleys, commercial amusement enterprises, taverns, dance halls and other places of recreation of a similar character, (i) Kennels and small animal hospitals and crematories; (j) Trailer courts, construebion labor campaw (k) Commercial airports (excepting individual or private airports aitd those operated exclusively for agricultural purposes), (l) Cemeteries, crematories, mausoleums or other places of the burial or other disposal of the human dead. (m) Storage of inflammables (exceptitng xor agricultural purposes), (n) Dumping and disposal areas (o) Manufacturing of acids explosives, fertilizer, glue, gypgums Lime, plaster of paris, pulp and paper, boet sugar, crushed rock, sand and gravel., cement, concrete and/or asphalt batching plants; concrete and clay products: (P) Industrial uses which might be objectionable by reason of emiss c,�n of noise, offensive odor, smoke, dust, bright light, vibration or involving the handling of explosives or dangerrans ma'i (jriaj:s (q) Hydro-electric generating facilities with installed et than five (5) megawatts. J)acity greater, (D) DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS The minimum requirements shall be those for the t d. For instance, a residential use would adhere to the edevelopOf lIlLint�srandards for the "R" Zones and a commercial use would adhere to t11(Z development standards for a "C" use. (E) OTHER STANDARDS AND REQUIREMENTS The folluwing additional standards and requirements siial], Ktf?ply in a U "Lone, except where specifically modified for conditi011a , urjr:s: (a) Off-street parking and loading shall be provided in conformity with the provisions of Sec. 24-35. (b) Limited control on land divisions: Any land division shall be limited to five (5)-acre minimum parcels unless regioned to a zone complying with the General Plan designation, 8:25 P.M. Harold Schooler - Amendment to the Butte Count Coda Defining Airports to read as follows: y ' add Section 24-21.2.5 (File 85-41) Section 24-21.2.5 AIRPORT; Any area of land or water which is used, or intended for use, for the landing and take-of.t of aircraft, and any appurtenant areas which are used, or intended for use, for airport buildings or other airport facilities or rights-of-way, and alt, airpor and facilities located thereon.. t buildings Airports may be any of the following classess 1) Agricultural Airstrips: Airstrips accessory to an agricultural o era• and used periodically for cropdusting purposes. Yon "Duster Strips". Commonly known as 2) Privately owned, private use airports, 5) Privately owned, public use airports. 4) Publicly ;owned' public use airports. 5)Publicly owned, Private use airports. Public use airports are those open to elle general public With or without a prior request to use the airport, Private use Airports are those regularly used by the owner or Tennant of the land on which the airport is located and periodically used byg uests. .f1r 1�1. MAL tJr 0 The above mentioneda PPlcations, maps, and negative declaration regarding imPact are on file and available for Planning Department public Orewi;1 at t cttvirptt�►reitCttl 7 County Canter Drive, Oro�,,,1�� he office o� Che. ;Butte CotstzC� , California. BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION B. A. KIRCHER,, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING TO DE PUBLISIIED' IN THE CHICO ENTERPRIS8 RECORD,,F. V , ON THURSDAY, MAY 23, 1985. 0 0 ELLE MERCURY, ANpP?',;IGS NEWS TO BE Z'Ul3LISHED IN THE GRIDLEY HERAI D AND PARADISE POST ON F DISPLAY AD DARK BORDER 3 COLUMN' RIAAY,f�1Y 24, 1,985, s Butte County Planning Commission - Amendment tOButte' County Code Section 24-66,A,-2 (General) limiting residential densities in the district to those density ranges specified sit' in the Butte County General Pl an. 84-1 9 Commissioner Lambert discussed the A-2 toning on the Ag. I side of the Greenline. She would like to initiate rezone hearings to zones that can -Form to the policy statement Of the Greenline. The following Was discussed be -Fore -the 9:30 hearing listed above. Staff stated that part of the A-2 property Commissioner Lambert is referring to is in the Durham Study Area a. Commissioner Lambert stated that if the Durham Area Plan comes forward and overlaps this area then maybe the Commission can do saffib Modification then, but she felt that it Would be appropriate to rezone these A-2 areas to be in conformance With the General Plan. It Was Moved by Commissioner Lambert, seconded by Commissioner Vertrutet and unanimously* carried to initate A rezone of all A-2 zoned property On the Ag. side Of the greenline; zoning to tOMOY With policies of the General Plan as detignat-Od on Exhibit Av the areas in red. Staff -to draft a plan Ian for zonings consistent with ol,tiez of the the General Plan 'he Aq, side of the Greenliho. The 9:30 hLAaring was discussed at this time. COmmitser Avis stated that' his intention on br-ihOhO this back before the Commission was that all uses of A-2 be consistent wi,",.�j the General Plan not just. resid,;Intial. 8ta'C*4 stated that -there was a. propos process unclassified. ,ed change in the Prbtss for A-�2 Commissioner VercrUse recommended deleting residential and add dehSltipp and uses then republish the public hearing. The hearing Was opened to the publit: Fred Gerst dxSr_Lktted the A�2 Ja-nd along the Feather River. Chuck NOI,�Oo dittusted uhtlass -6f, i xed zones. ThL- htariht 1 9 Was closed. It was moved by Commissioner Lambert* seconded by Commissioner` VriertrUsbt and UhAhl I 1MOUslY carried far approval as Follows.. I Note that the ebquXireMeht_S Of CEQA have been met and recommend that a Negatilvie, DetiarAtidh regarding environmental review impact 66 adopted- and B. Noteethat the zoning ng ordinance amendment 'conforms to the Butte CountyLe Recommend that th'F'_ Board of Supervi ors adopt an Ordinance amendment to Butte County Code Section 24-66 (for the A-2 Anne) stating that residentialuses are .nat to exceed the den�;itiez as set Porth in the Butte Claunty General Plan for each site. �»}�jwt�} .,N.k..�� �%, y �`� �( I�.�, JS 1111,1.+ 4\1 WlV��.M .Cill,lf'llMl\LY llyly' ,41A".4'1.4 /J i��lY .l'IAY i}Jd'ri7 �"',y,j �„iti7{U7. 1,.�' J..;7 (3 gOUNTY Or, i31J'1'i'll ENVIRONMENTAL C:Hr4CI L1,ST 17olZ 1 (to e comPletec by Wza AgericYl t • i3ACKGGRQUND F'10 # 82-58 1. Name Of proponent $Htte County �. Address of proponent and representative fil appllCabi.e) c/o Planning 7 Coon tGenter~Drive�,_ Ox lig oyz 3. Project description I 1 . 'MANDATORY i� i'Ni)iNG, S 01,1 SI'GNIFiCANC;L--' aDOC$ the projer.t liave tit.e potentia], to degrttdo the Y� A NO quality Of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or Wildlife species, Cause a fish or wildlife Population to drop below s,elf- sustaining levels} threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range at a rare or endangered plant or atti,mal or c.'1i.Calife important a.\amples of the major periods Of California history or prehistory? 1, Does the project have the I)otential. to achieve Short-term benefits to the cletr.iment of lo7tg�term, environmental goals? CA shout -terns impact: On the onvii•onment is one which occurs in a relatively brief period Of time while .long-term impacts twill endure into the future,) hoes the projeet havo impacts tvhicli are individu- ally limited, but culnulatively,considerable? (A project 'stay impact on two or more sepr►rate resources small , but where the ,effect o f y where the .iu►tact on each t•esoui'CO iSoreAte re,l. impacts on tate environment is sign total O) those (I t)oos the project have environmental effects trhich heir +s , e thol, d irectl )rtialaurorso indirectly? ott human �•i yl, III it1'I'l3RMINA'I`T N To btu rotilltletcl h) the I,ottcl Agency) „.. , , nn the basis oil this illitinl evttittFttiant [All Cit1cl the Proposed l I - D NOT have a significantAp /�- pt'o osed >ro; eel CC)11[a on the. M;i I onment, nd st NEGACT`VP.. NFIGI,A ta1'1'CgN rvil,'1 be c,feet Prepared, I/Wil I`ind that xtlthou�1h tiro proposed prolcct could have nsignifi- cant orfa t on the h shoot have hooh there eWill slob be a signiiioant t,effectert in this o;o ave ho the 1`11"C1ATTON MHASURh$ described on h the en added to the project, A NRCATIV> [ICI�ARATTON tvi'l): r, prL,11n,t•ed 1/Wi3,: filtd the proposed pt•ojoc:t MAY have a significant effect on the tativironment, and an 1?NV?RONWINTAi', IMPACT ARPOkT is required., 0ATh. September 231 1985 y . � .. i.CSGiN'TY , Rlt`[ 7'i , PL NlN hPA TMPNT K4-v A.`Str j 'of` ld_.�., SG11io�' rj.'311fiG�'Y” y IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS . zrp anations o . a 1 ''1 t, " on attached sheets)) yes and maybe<< answers arse required 1. MIRTN, Will the osal reslt YES a• Unstable earth condtionsuor htAXB NO i changiescanj;; geologic substructures? in b• Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the. sosl.`? co Change in. topography • or ground surface relief features'? d. Destruction, g olo covering or modification of an g• unique geolo 1C or physical y -- e Increase in wi features? eind or water erosion of soils; ther on or off-site? £• Changes in depositi sands, or changes on or erosion of bea:cli in siltation, depos tj or erosion which may modify the channel a river oon f or stream or the bed. of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? , 9. Loss of prime agriculturally Outside designated coals urban arasaoductve li Exposure of people or property to g �--- hazards such as ` illogic ---- , ea rth uakes slides, ground fai,luree or sxmilarr hazards?ud- 2. Alit. Will the proposal result in substantial, a. Air emissions or deterioration b. air Quality? of ambient The creation of abjectonable,odor smoke or fumes? .. C Alteration of air movement, moisture; or temperature, or �- any change in climate, locally or regionally? 3 'WATER: Will the proposal result in substantial: a• Changes in currents or the course or direction of water movements in either marine or fresh waters? b. Changes et in s absorpt . or the rate and amount of ion ratess dr ainage patterns, surface c. Need for off-site surface drainagerimprove`- Oerits, including vegetation removal ization or Culvert installatrOmO ' channel - d. hs waters? to the course o1 flow of flood waters? e+ Chatgo in the amo�int o water body? f surfacO water in °an Y 'y" P. Discharge into Sul -face 'igate.r5 or in any alteration of surface �1'` water quality; including b,At not limited to temperafyure, cl ssol�red xnen or 'turbidity? g� . .'iteration of the direction r or rate to of ground waters? of flow" h, Change in the Quantity of either through direct adI 1?rons dowaters , Y ^ Aq-ujf ,s, or through intercOPtion o f ani aQit for by cuts or excavati:ons? i Red uction ,in the amount of tvdteratherwi�;b available for public � water supplies; J • Exposure Of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? YES MAYBE NO 4. PLANT LIFE, Will the proposal result in substantial: i. CTange in the diversity of species, or number of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass crops, and aquatic plants)? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants?;. c Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a, barrier to the normal replenish- eplenishmenti mentof existing species? t d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop?_ S. ANIMAL LIFE. Will the proposal result in substantial: a: Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds, Land animals including reptiles, fish and shell fish benthic organisms or insects). b. Reduction in the numbers of any uny ue rare or endangered species of animals? _._ C. c. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? C`.. d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife `^ habitat? cw 6. NOISE. Will the proposal result in substantial; a. Increases in existing noise levels? b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? 7. LIGHT AND, GLARE. Will the proposal produce signiliEc nt l ght and glare? C_ S. LAND USE. tVill the proposal result in a substantial a,lteraltion of the present or planned land use of an area? 9 NATURAL RESOURCES,; 11111 the proposal result in su 'stantial - a, Increasein the rate of use of any natural resources? b. Depletion of any non-xenewt,ble natural �W resources? 10. AISIC OF UPSET. Willthe proposal involve: A. A risk of explosion or the release of hazard- ous subst.ah�,es (including, but not limited to, Oil, pesticides) chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions b, Possible :interference with an emergency response pian or emergency evactatio plan? ..._ 11. POPULATION. Will the proposal alter the location, `Mri noon, density, or growth rate of the human populati.onrl _ .:�:. _ 12: :HOUSING. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? _ M 4 tt k' YES MAYBE NO 13. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Will the proposal result in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicle, movement? ~~ b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? � c. Substantial impact on existing transportation systems? d. Significant alterations to prestnt patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? f. ]Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, Cw bicyclists or pedestrians? 14. PUBLIC SERVICES. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services; a: Fire protection? b. Police protection? c. Schools? �• r d, Parks or other recreational facilities? e.` Maintenance of public facilities, including roads?. f. Other governmental services? 15. ENERGY. Will the proposal result in,. a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel.or energy? b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? L 16. UTILITIES. Will the propsal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following: a4 Power or natural gas? b. Communications systems? c Water: d4 Sewer or septic tank? oj Storm Water drainago? c f: Solid waste and disposal? 17i HUMAN HEALTH. Will the proposal result ins a: creation of any health hazard or potentia: 'O health hazard (excluding mental health) b. Exposure of people t�, potential health r hazards? 18: AESTHETICS, Will the proposal. result in the . o structIon of any scenic vista or view open".o the or will the proposal result in the public;, open creation of an aestheticall offensive site a t y r, to public view? 4 YES MAYBh NU, 19. RECREATION. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational oppo rtunities? 20, CULTURAL RESOURCES '- ,a Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological site? rse phys.,eal, b, Iq .Lll the proposal result in adve or, aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or Illstoric building, structure Or (`bject? c. Does the proposal have the potential to cau5c a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values'? d. Will the proposal res" , rict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact VIRONMENTAL EVALUATION 82-58 DISCUSS1% OF E N "Mis proposal includes two amendments to the Butte County Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, 1111c first amendment is to li-Mit the residential densities in the A-2 (General) zone to those dens'Ity range,- specified in the Butte County General Plan. Tile density would be limited to .1 maximum of 6, 1.'J or 20 dwelling tin -its per acre clepunding on whether tile A-' Zoned parcel is in a low, medium oil high density residential de,;ignation. I The second amendment would repeal the present PA -C (Planned Area --Cluster) zone and adOPL a new section 24-126 entitled Pul) (Planned Unit Development) zone. petenti.al environmental impacts of these two amendments is minimal: rta most ca,-t—,I subsequent projects would require a discretionary permit rrc)m the Count,, -.n,l therefore environmental review. Appropriate mitigatiun measure,-;, �`ttovnatives to the project and redesign of tile -tient time. �,tost residential projects in the project would Occur at zone would not require A hearing or di�cretionary County io�rdsca ing pl",l��- i,,,ould be r(iviewed as art Of 11eview. Parking and p p they building permits for Such p-rojO-G-ts. The amendment of the A- 2 None would actually roaresent a Positive step The,;- nnly limitation on in reducinq potential elivirO11111011tal impacts. densitics in tile, A-2, zone at present ii� the soil capability -,for septic 1�* nt wil, Il,,i,v0 t1lo effect of lessening potential. SYStUlfts The amondme 1 . khqlsit-LeS in areqS t[1,-rt11avc 0%cellent soil, for sewage disposal systems I 11�1,M) Zone as with tho 1)1'esont PA -C tono, would involve envi,ta- rom'"1. in. each nstance. rh 0 111ejjor difference would be that the PUD i '0 1 jlr� - residc -!,. ) -AMOTCiL d jj1dust-rial uses: COU14 nosy occur for mit. -il coi 11 all 1,11t• olivironmon'ta.1 coneerns that would be reviewed for pUD -rezones and tejltatiVo StibdjVjslot IS would be those items marked with a 'It" in -the initial study checklist, I'lle location and magnitude of the PtOJOct will doterjii,ne tjl(-� level of '111port,--inca of , the I toms marked ithdor the 20 catogories listed, damp 82-S8 DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (continued,,) A Negative Declaration rega-ding environmental imPact is recofoolonded for both zoning ordinance amendments; Discretionary projects Ihat would be affected by either amendment 1vil . involve a, Negative Declaration, a Mitigated Negative Declaration regarding enviro1111jental impact or an Environmental Impact Report. yr 1 Appendix p page APPLICANT ADDRESS OWNER NNING COMMISSION SUMMARY A& in s .. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Amendment to But e _ t i c `� t to those density ranges speal.J� �y -2 Genera_ 7) ,...?.�i iuu; resp, en a. ens t es n the district General. Plan. S eciEicall to add S'ecL d in the Butte County "`- - (l) : ResidentJ,ni, uses are not to excee the densities as set for in the Butte County General Pl,{1,, N PROPERTY ZONED A_2 LOCATED Cor each specific site County Wide ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS () IDENTIFIED AS AP County Willa GEN. PLA14 PROJECT CONSISTENT? CITY L= DATE APPLICATION RECEIVED 1710-85 DATE REZONING MITION SIGNATURES CHECKED PERCENTA,Gp DATE LEGAL DESCRIPTION PREPARED OR CHECKED; DATE PUBLICATION NOTICE WRITTEN PUALISHED DATE DISPLAY AD PREPARED —�--- PUBLISHED PLACE NBWSPARER NOTICE (S) PUBLISHED - 0 C p • . . G $.- A11 Five llisPlay Ad DATE MAILING LIST PREPARED DATE MAIL -OUT NOTICES WRITTEN MAILED NUMBER - ENVIRONMBNTAL DETERMINATION '""'""""`— CATEGORICAI, fiXEi.ipTTON - DATE FILED AND DATE x NEGATIVE DECLARATION DATE ADOPTED ENV. IMPACT REPORT - DATE CERTIFIED _.._.,w...,. OTHER COMM ISSION HLARING DATES February 7, 1985 at 9:80 p,m, COMMISSION ACTION,. N:7 I 85-286 Continued hearing (2I34j Butte County Code Section 2466Y fanning Cotrrnisson - densities in t ` A-2 (general) limit��amendment to Butte CountY GeneralPlan(tromto ose 4/2d85sxt 9 residential Y ranges specified in the (CHAllU'lAN F'ULTON ABSENT AT THIS TIME) Motion; ADOPTED ORDINANCE 2461, FINDING THAT IT MEET OF CEOA AND ADOPTED A NEC41TIVE DECLARATION IT MV S THE Q IMPACT. FOUND I�1� RE UIFIEri9EDJTS NOT . CONE'ORMS To REGARDING ENVIIZONMEN`TAL 2S rHE REA$ON TO DO IT. THE G �". EN>;RAL PLAN O THAT S Vote; 1 Y,2 Y 3 N 4 "X 5 AS (Motion ca ` Fried) ]3N�TE CAIlNT1' I3OAkD oi� SCJI�IJItV1$OitS M NII � N ZES Aptil 166 10$5 �5-243 Continued hearing - Butte County Planning Commission - amendment to Butte (509) County Code Section 24-66 - A-2 (general) limiting residential densities in the district to those density ranges specified in the Butte County General Plait (from 3/10/86). (CONTINUED TO APPIL 16, 1985, AT 10:30 A.'M. ) 9 } ' BUTTE COUN Y' IWAxn OPSUP�iKVxS0it5 M�I�UT�S hPR�I� �, 1955 u t Chat rmar,1 Avz ��6 stated he 4ioul d Z i ke to re-. restricting uses in the A- initiate tl�e. wxF 2 (General) zone to, tho hroaect far _h the Gerc,�ral Plan for each parcel, Uses that conform Tt wasmoved by Commissioner Vercruse, and unanimous) Lam6�ert, seconded b uses i n the A-2 Y carried to re-�i ni ti a•Fi,y, ucmx n psi Qner (General) Zone to those uses thatcan res restricting General Plan for each parcel. con�fiot m With the This hearing wait to,'be set fcr February T 1995. ANNING COMMISSION SUMM1RYIFg APPLICANT =72 Code Amendment - Board of Su ervisors"" ADDRESS OWNER PROJECT DESCRIPTION A-2 Code Amendme't limitin reszden_ tidensite ,,, the district to those densit ran es s ecfied ill, the Bu to Coun �. N PROPERTY ZONEDt tv Gen r� � --------�r LOCATED Coup Wide Plan ASSESSOYt'S PARCEL NUMBER(S) IDENTIrIED AS AP GEN. PLAN PROJECT CONSISTENT? �----------..�.... DATE APPLICATION RECEIVED CITY DATE REZONING PETITION SIGNATURES CHECKED DATE LEGAL DESCRIPTION PREPARED OR CHEC�Ei�CENTAGE KED; DATE PUBLICATION NOTICE WRITTEN DATE DISPLAY AD PREPARED PUBLISHED PLACE NEWSPAPER NOTICE (S) PUBLISHED� O ..� . PUBLISHED DATE MAILING LIST PREPARED DATE MAIL -OUT NOTICES WRITTEN NUMBER ENVIRONMENTAL. DETERMINA`1'ION CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION .. DATE PILED ;AND DATE X��... NEGATIVE DECLARATION DATE ADO PTE ENV. IMPACT REPORT DATE CERTIFIED „_, OTkIER COMMISSION BEARING DATES COMMISSION ACTION i BOARD ACTION l a 1` / _�,,.........r„ ANNING COMMISSION SUMMARYE APPLICANT A-2 Code Amendment - Butte County Planning ADDRESS OWNER ---- ---- ---------- PROJECT DESCRIPTION A-2 Code Amendment limiting r�sidentcl densities in the district to those density ranges specified in the Butte: County General N 'PROPERTY ZONED LOCATED County wide an ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER(S) IDENTIFIED AS AF GEN. PLAN PROJECT CONSISTENT? DATE APPLICATION RECEIVED 8/ 8/83 CITY ` ..»_. DATE REZONING PETITION SIGNATURES CHECKED --PERCENTAGE AGE. DATE LEGAL DESCRIPTION. PREPARED OR CHECKED* DATEPUBLICATION NOTICE WRITTEN DATE DISPLAY AD PREPARED PUIlLZSHED PUBLISHED _ PLACE NEWSPAPER NOTICES PUBLISHED 0. C. Po GO to DATE MAILING LIST PREPARED ICES WRITTEN MAILED DATE .MAZE-OUT NOT: _ _ NUMBER ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION - DATE FILED AND DATE ..- »,. NEGATIVE DECLARATION - DATE ADOPTED' ' ENV. IMPACT REPORT - DATE CERTIFIED OTHER COMMISSION HEARING DATES r9 _ -- COMMISSIONACTIO N �,{'''' BOARD ACTION ORDINANCE (S) ADOPTED COMMENTS BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given by the Butte County Planning Contln:i.gs hearings will be held on Thursday, January 19, 1984 a.t 10 (fid .nt Butte County Board of Supervisors' Room, Administration 00 P tlis.i public n in the Center Drive, Oroville, Cal :for;nia, regarding the following: Colltorr 25 County ITEMON WHICH A NEGATIVE DECLARATION REGARDING ENVIRO7vfi�EN'I'AL.,IMPACT HAS 723I301ZIICEOMMENDED 1.0:00 P.M. Butte County Board of Supervisors --- Code Section 24-66 Awl (General) r Aitinnte�tt to Butte County ties in the district to those density sspec.,.f'ied in the Butte County General Plan. Specificallyt.o�.t,sidei��l-,�.al uensi- (a) (1) : Residential 'uses are not to eXee the densities add Section 4uG6 as set forth in the Butte County. General Plan for each specific site. The above mentioned application is on file and available viewing at the office of the Butte County Planning Departmfor ent public Center Drive, Orovi,lle, California. Count, BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - B. A. .KIRCHER, DIRECTOR Or PLANNING TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OROVILLE MERCURY, CHICO ENTERPRISE BIGGS NEMS ON THURSDAY, JANUARY 5, 1984. RECORD AND TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE PARADISE POST AND GRIDLEY HERALD 6, 1984. ON FRIDAY, JANUARY 1/4 page display ad dark border r OJ rA ra: B A- Kircher, DlrL ctor of Planning FROM; D. R. Hiron.imus, Planning SUBJECT: A-2 Zoning DATE: March 2.8, 1981 Response to `a request of the hoard of Supervisors: 1. The area of the county is a " (11070,000 acre's+ PPrOximately 1670 square miles :F • Of this, aPProximately 5l square miles is Within the five c�.ties leav,inl; pproxatnY51 1650 square miles unincorporated. of this, approximately 360 square miles (230, 000 les I- j is zoned A-2, leaving approximatel l2 z square miles (1 036.000 aces �. y �� ' ' ) more Specifically zoned, 2. The A-2 zoning represents a-pproximately 22,24 of t}ie uni corporated area and approximately 21..80 of the County totnl; 3, The 11-2 zoning consists of approx�.mat01Y 10;000 parcels, Estimated cost o notifying Property owners by mail, is.. Postage; 7.0,000 ea @ $.20 cat X2,000.00 Printing: 80.06 Mailing Labels(i).p. j _ - ' 100.00 (est. j Total �. $2,180.00 DRH1r au►}n Co. Pjannintj Ce�ft�m. "C a N 4 1984 OrOVilla, C411191nJ4 Administrative Office February 24, 1984 To: Bettye Kircher, Planning Directo From:: r Mike Pyeatt, Deputy AdM, nistrative Officer Subject: Regues't for information - from F'eb, ► uary 14, 1984 agenda Item 5.03 on the Boa rd ''s Board of Supervisors _ agenda was the following item: Butte County Proposed negative declaration regardin impact and Code amendment district to 'those densit A-& to be limiting residential densities int e Count�wride. Y ranges specified in the Butte County g environ►t►ental my General Plan It is our understand,ng that the Board co this until the March 31, 1984 regular agenda. ntihUed further discuss` requested' that a report from the Planniga I Itionall discussion on following ,slues: y� the Board. Department be prepared on the 1. The amount of land presently zoned A-2; ?, The cost of notifying '117 property Mthers b - y mail" ur an estimate 3= A report indicating the amount of land Thank you. prestntly zone 'h the County: MP/cap Deputy OM'I nistrotive officer cc Agenda Pending polder 7 84-145 Butte 1550)Y Board Of Supervisors eCounty impact and Code amendment Proposed oposA2neggative declaration regarding densities in the dist,Ciet to those density ranges s e. County General Plan be limiting residential Coun,ywide. specified in the Butte 84--14.5 :MOTION'.: FIND T � ",(Contrd)� H fiHE tEQ[rTRLtN!CS OI•~ C ,/ TIVI) ORDIJ AN REGARDING ENV-1pONMENTAL IMPACT;EQA HAVE BEEN MET ANCJ ADOPT NEOA-' ZOiVING QRbINANCL AI�lENn �IIVb THAT xIiE -INTENT,, OPT DOES CONFORM TO fillE G�;( Nk2AL PLAN, THE r AND MOVE TO ADOPT AN 'ORDINANCE AMENDING fiH1; A••2 ZONE A5 STATED. VOTE: I N M �t�FSTE ?, D 4 N Y � "N X �Mol:ion failed) DI2ECfi01t fid CA5 TALOGUE ALL A-22 i'ROPE INNA AN ESTIMATE OF THE COST OF � RT'ES' HOW MANY NOTIFYING INDIVIDUAL PROpERTY OWNEFtSj ACRES . OAP' 1984 Code Amendment - A-2 to be limiting residential densities it, the district to those den zity ranges specifitid in the Butte County General Plan - reforrpa back fl-bm the Board discussion County-wioe. of Supe rvi tors for Chairman Schrador stated that the coMmi this item On a CoUnty-tqldo basis, ss on had already discuosod The hearing Was Opened to the public. The hearing tAjaS Closed ztaff. and cOMMOhtt Confined to the Commission and itwas moved by CbMMis.jaxoner AvIsy, seconded For approval as +oJIOWS.- by COMMiSS�ibner L.-tmbert, Note that that the requirements of GEQA have been met and recommend a negative declaration regarding enVironmehtal i adopted, and mpact be B. Note that the zoning ordinance amendments conform to the Butte, County General plan; and C. Recommend that the Board of Supervizort adopt an ordinance amendment ,Section 24-66 to limit residential zon4t Onsity rangL-,-. sped I residential densities in the A�2 General Plan, ecifOd in the Ay�Sg Commissioners Avis, Vert::rUtSe.) BehUh,IMv Lambert and Chairman NOIW8: No one ABSENT : No one hB15TAINtW: No one Motion tdrrixod. 4j, A-2 Code Amendment to limit the rvsident�.al densAties in the district to those density ranges specified in the Butte County General Plan. Referred back From the Doard, for dAscussion County Wide Staff stated that the recommendation on this item to the )Bodrrd 4ias for County wade, that it was originally publii3bed for County I-ticle. Vice Chairman Schrader questioned the conoernt of the Hoard? Staff stated that there was very little discussion at the board leve, Commissioner Avis asked if this needed to be published for public hearings? He stated that this should be adopted for County wide as soon as possible. It was moved by Coioilssloner Avis, seconded by Commissioner Lambert,_ to reschedule this matter for public hearings and to republish AYES: Commissioners Avis, Vercruse, Behunin, Lambert, and Vice Chairman Schrader l` 088: No one ABSENT No one ABSTAIRM No one Motion carried, PLANMt-l•, C(CMINISSJ:CN L3�91-1) Closed Roaring - Board of Supervisors - Proposed negative, tion regarding environmental review and Code Amendment W2etoara- be limiting residential densities in the district to those density ranges specific in the Butte County General Ilan: (Prom 1/15/83) MOTIONS DENY ORDINANCE BEING PRESENTED- REFEV IT BACK To THE PLANNING COMM'18SION TO REINSTITUTE HEARINGS ON THE SAME POLICY, BUT EXPANDED TO COUNTY -WADE BASIS. S VOTE; 1 Y 2 N 3 Y 4 Y 5 Y (Notion carried) Board of Supervisors -.Code Amendment, A-2 to be limiting residential densities in the district to those density ranges specified in the Butte County General to t g Staff gave background. The hearing was opened to the public. Louis Camenzind, 2194 Oro -Chico Nightvay, Durham, want the proposal. He stated that the Commission should rev5c�,r the G wanted review the Clarification on and go back to the original proposal. reenlne Vase Chairman Schrader Pointed out that theCount eliminating the A-2 zoning. Y Was; in the process. of Ed West, City of Chico discussed using limited uses Plan. Brief discussion.. under the General. Robert Huskey, stated that if the Commission ch it could affect a lot of people and this hearing 'should b more input from the people. .angel the A-2 radically zone in the Count p p Discussion on notifying everyone ninnthe A°2 Y• Discussion on the A-2 being eliminated. Mr; Huskey hoped that the Commission would continue this hearing. Vice Chairman. Schrader g questioned if this proposal was referred to the Land Development Committee? Lee Colby stated no., Doug Magnuson stated that if he had not gotten a call, he would not have known about the meeting, Commissioner Avis felt that there was adequateubli p Lczty. Staff noted that when there is more than 1000 propert noticed that the procedure is to do a 1/4 page ad exytOwners to be Code. P e Government Vice Chairman ,Schrader discussed sending this requesti p Committee for review. _to Development the Land this issue when in stated that the people had Commissioner Behun Board. the Land Use Element was beforeath�pGnmmiSsion�a discuss This is to keepthe A� d the is a good idea. 2 iYf conformity with the General Flan and Bob Huskey stated again the deet for at least t 2 or 3 additional meetings. Comma.ssioner Lambert, stated that People At the board and the Land p p Will have the chance to be heard dations De�Elopment Commatte,e can also review and make recommendations pr* to the Board hearings. P„N r w_ yv�y II ` r �`CbMbix.Sa: {+yew, StlY. V t b e i 'S .yia, vw^rs• w „ »w • Commissioner Avis stated that it is hoped that the A-2` will be rezoned. in the near future,.but this is needed in the meantime. Lee Colby commented that it was his experience that it took approximately 16 months to get a General Plan and Rezone. Commissioner Avis staffed that the proposed change would mean that resident- ial dev,r.lopment can not exceed density limits of the existing General Plan designation. Commissioner Lambert questioned that the land use designations and policies normally take precedence over zoning and policies. Staff stated that the only time the Land Use designation is taken into consideration is when there is a specific zoning or rezoning of property, subdivision or land division, not at the building permit levet, when the Government Code requires specific consistency findings Russ Groninger discussed the density out on Clark Road. Commissioner Avis stated the designation in the Clark Road area was Ag. Residential with a density range of 1-40 acres. Staff stated this was not a General, Plan amendment, but a proposal to limit densities to comply with the General Plan in the areas zoned A-2'. .Louis Camenzind questioned who was going to file the EIR7 Vice Chairman Schrader stated that an_ESR was not needed on this type of project. Doug Magunson Questioned when this would take effect? Staff stated that this has to go to the Board to be snt for hearings and adopted the ordinance would take 30 days to become effective, any permits alreadY issued would not be affected. The hearing was closed and comments confined to the Commission. A motion was made by Commissioner Avis, seconded by Commissioner Behunin, for approval as follows: A. Note that the requirements of CBQA have been met And recommend that a negative declaration regarding environmental impact be adopted; and B, Note that the zoning ordinance amendments conform to the Butte County General Plan; and C. Recommend that the Board of Supervisors adopt an ordinance amending Section 24-66 to limit residential densities in the A-2zone to those density ranges specified in the Butte County General Plan, r"_..,.�. y,... y,. �.,l me , iX obb, 6 $o f AYES; Commissioners Avis, Bohunin, Lambert and Vice Chairman Schrader DOES No one ABSENT: No one ABSTAINED: No-one Motion carried: t Y T bq t � ��k�'S txON�'tx Oc��,7 �� 9 '+i 4, A' TOO FROW *Inter-Departme'nfal Memorandum Planning Commission Steve Streeter, Planning SUaJECr: Zoning Ordinance Amendments for A-2 and PUD DA'M- September 27 1933 The amendment of- the A-2 [General) zone to limit residential densities to the general plan dosignations will solve a problem that most often occurs in the Chico area. The amend:rnent will cOnforIn to the correlation Of the R-,�, R=4, C-1, C-2, NIFIP and PA -C sones to t11t; density ranges of the appropriate general plan de5ignntions. when the board of SuPVrvisors adopted the revised housing element in September, 1981-, the mentioned zones were limited to the residential densities in the general plan as part of that action. If the amendment to the A-2 zone is approved, the Planning Department would work closely with the Environmental Health Division and the Building Department for both septic and building permits 11his procedure is presently used in the multiple zones listed above. Refor also to the discussion contained in the initial: study for these zoning ordinance amendments The zoning ordinance committee, as well as the land development committee, have previously reviewed the proposed PUP oidinanre, Both committees are basically in agreement with the PUD ordinance as pre5entl,y written. RECl1MMENDATIONS A, vote that tho requirements of CrnA have hewn met and recommend that A negative declaration regarding environmental impact ;be adopted; and B. ;Vote that the zoning; ordinance amendments conform to the Butte County General Plan; and Ci Recommend that the Board of Supervisors adopt an ordinance amending ., Section 24-66 to limit residential densities in the A -Z zonae to those density ranges specified in the. Butte County. General Plan and repealing Section 24-126 PA -C (Planii.e,d Area -Cluster) zone and adopting Section 24-1.26 PUD (Planned Unit Development) zone 4 SAS/JP Attachments The text of the proposed PUD zone Initial StLI-dy Check hist y 14. Butte County Board of Supervisors-proposedte,ga'tive declarat wi regarding environmental impact and Code amendment - A-2 to be limiting residential densities in the district to those density ranges specified in the Butte County Genera. Plan W Countywide.Action requested: SET. PUBLIC HEAAING FCR FEBl.2t 4RY 14, ,1984., AT 10:45 A.M. 83.922 -Board of 'supervisors -- Codc+ ameridment, A-2 to be limiting (lag) residential densities in, the district to those density rangos specific in the Butte County General Plan, (HEARING CLOSL!D; ' TO HL LISTED ON REOULAR AGENDA OF NOVEMBER 150 1,9831FOR A DECISION.) 1001) Off' ITEMS ON WHICH A NEGATIVE DECLARATION REGARDING �ENVIROh$IENTAL IMPACT HAS BEEN RECOMMENDED. 7.50 p.m. Butte County Board of Supervisors - Amendment to Butte County Code Section 24-66 A-2 (General), limiting resiXlential densities in the district to those density ranges specified in the Butte County General Plan. Specifically to add Section 24-66 (a) (1) 24-66 (a)(l): Residential uses are not, to exceed the densities as set forth in the Butte County General Plan for each specific site. Request by Mr. Thad Wakeman to consider permitting multiple units in zones consistent with Low Density RoSidential, Staff discussed Mr. Wakeman's request and read memo dated $/4i83; The ]cttel- was entered into the record: Discussion on the Zoning Revision Committee being the p3,.ce to discuss and consider changes_. Staff- stated that multi dwelli,gs in an A -R zone are not Consistent'with the General Plan.. Discussion. On multi dwellings and duPl,exes. Staff stated thatyou can not deny a use permit because itis not consist With the General Plan. Staff also suggested that the Zoning Revision ent el look at this matter. Commissioner Behunin made a motion, Seconded by Commissioner Avis to refer this to the Zoning Revision Committee. Commissioners Avis, Behunin, Lambert and Vice Chairman Schrader 3JOBS! Na one ABSENT., Chairman Bennett ABSTAIN: No one Motion parried. ANNI'Nd"'C"ONNI, SS x't?N MINUTES August u ) �I g s V 3.983 b♦ R iY + L 1 4.44 S tSRr FA CJw- r f a c„t D Referral from the Board of Supervisors - Establishment of a density Policy for A-2 zoning districts. Commissioner Schrader suggested changing the wording of the A-2 to read the. same as the A-2 Ltd. Discussion on the A-2 ltd. not conforming to the Genera. Plan. Discussion on initiating hearings. Ed West,, City of Chico, was concerned with so much area around the cities being zoned A-2, not being consistent with the General Plan. City Commissioner Nelson discussed the eliminating of the A-2 zone with the Commission. Commissioner Schrader made a motion to initiate hearings, seconded by Commissioner Avis to recommend amending the A-2 general ;tone to require that. the development and density reflect that which is required in the General; Plan. AYBS: Commissioners Avis, Schrader, Behunn, Lambert and Chairman Bennett NOES: No one ABSENT: No one ABSTAIN: Into one Motlun carried.___ _ - 83-653 Establishment of a density policy for A-2 zoning districts. (Super visor Dolan - from 7/19/83) MOTION: THAT WE REFER -TiP. A-2 r "-1i1TY tOr1INC TO STAFF Fr)tl kwD To rija hING 201t 'REVIEW. S M VOTE: 1 Y 2 Y 3 Y 4 A 5 Y (Motion carried) i Y .. tOARD OP 8MAV180A MTNUTt8 ;Aug s 2; x`83